/3/ - 3DCG

[Anonymous No.777910]

Post renders of people that could fool you into thinking that they're real. Pic is not that.

[Anonymous No.777915]

someone really really likes subsurface scattering

[Anonymous No.777917]

>>777915
Yeah, he looks like he's made of wax, or has baby flesh.

[Anonymous No.777936]

>>777910
El ogro de las Americas

[Anonymous No.777939]

This one made me do a double take

[Anonymous No.777942]

>>777939
Why? It looks plastic

[Anonymous No.777953]

>>777942
Post your work

[Anonymous No.777974]

>>777953
>if you can't do better your criticism is invalid meme
kys retard

[Anonymous No.777993]

>>777974
Post your work

[Anonymous No.778003]

>>777910
would be THAT convincing to me if he had a larger jaw

[Anonymous No.778051]

This one while a bit lackluster in the texturing anat anartomy i always liked. Looks great as long as you dont zoom in, good skin values and nice overall forms

>>777939
Even in small image color values dont look right, the texture just isnt there at all even if surface detail looks fine
>>777910
Damn thats some wonky anatomy

[Anonymous No.778052]

[Anonymous No.778065]

>>778051
This is great. Looks totally real until you zoom in. I wonder how it could be improved. Perhaps peach hair? Maybe the lips could use a better transition of skin types. I dunno but it looks real.

[Anonymous No.778071]

>>778051
fuck. I couldn't tell it was cg until you mentioned. legit thought you were using a real picture to demonstrate a point to op or something

[Anonymous No.778073]

>>778052
eye bags give it away imo. maybe if they were a bit plumper, even if that doesn't exactly match with the actual actor's traits

[Anonymous No.778082]

[Anonymous No.778085]

>>777974
Post your work.

[Anonymous No.778383]

>>777910
tom hardly

[Anonymous No.778452]

>>777910

[Anonymous No.778453]

>>778452

[Anonymous No.778454]

>>778453

[Anonymous No.778455]

>>778454

[Anonymous No.778456]

>>778455

[Anonymous No.778465]

*gets replaced by AI in one day*

[Anonymous No.778492]

>>778465
>muh AI boogeyman
If Ai will make hyperrealistic characters at a push of a button, you can be sure it will do the same with most other artstyles, as those are even easier to master/reproduce

[Anonymous No.778499]

[Anonymous No.778501]

>>778499
Really? To me that looks like someone took a photograph of her face and mapped it onto some face geometry as a texture.

[Anonymous No.778504]

>>778499
>>778501
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/3EoWm

[Anonymous No.778507]

>>778504
I remember there was some suspicion about this dude's portraits, back in the day. Not sure if it was cleared up or not, but I remember people were saying that his works are fakes

[Anonymous No.778508]

>>778507
Indeed, looking at his gallery. The early stuff is kinda fishy. I suppose it doesn't really matter though.

[Anonymous No.778510]

>>778504
Yeah, it's just photoprojection. Of course it looks good if you just have the same perspective as the photo and map it 1 to 1.

[Anonymous No.778511]

>>778507
Looks like he did the hair alright, but the rest was textured with a photo overlay. Shadows are exactly like in the photo, and there is no clear perspective change in his "3D" renders.

[Anonymous No.779313]

>>778453
woah, this one is insane.

[Anonymous No.780496]

How much do you guys think a 3D model like this of Taylor Swift would cost me? Fully rigged of course.

[Anonymous No.780502]

>>778501
StyleGAN is already there.
https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/
Just a matter of time before it's adapted to 3D.
>pic related

[Anonymous No.780503]

>>780502
*derp* was meant for
>>778492
not
>>778501

[Anonymous No.780504]

>>778492
also, strangely the AI works well with human faces, but kinda sucks at cats and totally fails with environmental details.

[Anonymous No.780537]

>>780496
2k to 5k.

[Anonymous No.780541]

>>778499
>>778504
>https://www.artstation.com/artwork/3EoWm
Lmao fuck off with photo projections.
You can project fucking photo on a square and it will look photo realistic ... its a fucking photo.

[Anonymous No.780563]

>>777993
>>778085
post your work

[Anonymous No.780566]

>>778454
I will bet you any amount of money if you posted this shit on /v/ with some one-liner meme every retard on the board would think it was real

[Anonymous No.781450]

>>778065
The vascularity on the arms looks a little off

[Anonymous No.781451]

>>778452
there’s noise,
why?

[Anonymous No.781456]

>>777939
It's the eyebrows.

[Anonymous No.781466]

>>781451
Probably because the artist didn't let the render finish

[Anonymous No.781857]

[Anonymous No.781880]

photorealism is the big gay

[Anonymous No.781884]

>>781857
It's crazy how highly detailed something can be and still look so obviously cg.

[Anonymous No.781904]

>>781880
>photorealism is the big gay
and that's the big cope of stylization fags who lack the skills to even attempt realism

[Anonymous No.781911]

>>781884
>obviously
I wonder if it's the same for the untrained eye.

[Anonymous No.781915]

>>781911
It's not, I'm quite certain 8/10 normies would think this>>781857 is a real photo, especially if they look at it on a phone

[Anonymous No.781927]

>>781884
Looks too sharp and clean, photographs, even with the more expensive camera and lenses, have subtle imperfections and softness.

[Anonymous No.782026]

>>777910
Maybe I'm a brainlet, but I look at this scene and still can't believe that's not just Hugh Jackman playing both characters.

[Anonymous No.782147]

[Anonymous No.782149]

>>778453
St. Vicent really has let herself go

[Anonymous No.782154]

>>782147
>this fukken .jpg again.
Every single thing coming out of that old cunt is deeply flawed. It's like he's celebrating the dark ages.

Realism in art coincide first with things like 'Venus de Milo' from the ancient world of the Roman republic.
A society that celebrating philosophy, that built paved roads sewer systems bridges and aqueducts.

Into stylized cartoonish depictions of the human form during the dark ages, an era defined by social decay and splintered rule of illiterate armed warlords.
A society that rejected the real world and instead appealed to fantasy thru piety and religious fundamentalism.

Then came the renaissance, an era that returned to the study of the naturalistic world and obsession with the physical form.
A revolution that transitioned into the age of enligtenment that lay the groundwork for western institutions like democracy and the sciences.

The man in that .jpg is a utter disgrace and every word that falls of his lips is the confused ramblings of an old cunt and the mockery of truth.

[Anonymous No.782212]

Karimi has a couple of impressive renders, while you can clearly see that they're CG they're nonetheless impressive
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/28y5qK

[Anonymous No.782237]

>>782154
Hello you nobody

[Anonymous No.782255]

>>782154
stopped reading when you claimed romans invented realism lol. another fucking high school dropout retard piecing together a grand theory from half-understood youtube videos and that one time in class when you took a break from playing pokemon under the table. i'm so glad i can just close the tab to make you disappear forever because the people who have to deal with you in real life must want to fucking kill themselves every time you open your mouth to vomit your 80iq wisdom all over the dining room table

[Anonymous No.782266]

Somebody should render George Washington or somebody like that whome we only have oil canvas paintings of to know what those old people from hundereds of years ago look like.

[Anonymous No.782356]

>>782147
One thing is realism in style, and the other is realism in content.
Would a photorealistic image of a girl fucking a dragon be boring to him too?

[Anonymous No.782368]

>>780566
Probably but i think the hair gives it away.

[Anonymous No.783081]

>>782255
extremely based

[Anonymous No.783547]

>>782255
thanks god for that post

[Anonymous No.784612]

>>777939
mmm lower eyes lids need that fleshy texture not skin texture, also eyelashes need to align a little more and have little wringles so they same more natural in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.784628]

>>782255

so on point...

[Anonymous No.784630]

>>782255
>>783081
>>783547
>>784628

This has to be a samefag from the 'oldcunt.jpg' poster.

[Anonymous No.784689]

They look like how you might imagine an IRL android to appear.

[Anonymous No.784919]

>>782255
Thanks for the pasta Chef.

[Anonymous No.785828]

>>782154
Based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.785830]

>>782255
>how dare you imply romans invented naturalistic art
>y-y-you FUCK
Are you autistic or smthn

[Anonymous No.785832]

I dont know why people wasted their talents creating photo realism humans you can create other kind of species realism cgi why get stuck with boring old realism

[Anonymous No.785836]

>>778492
It's funny because that's the exact opposite of how it's actually shaken out.
Training data for realistic things is far easier to acquire than stylized data, and because realism is harder to achieve, it's also more useful to have an AI for it than for creating stylized results.

[Anonymous No.785943]

>>785832
Because 1) it's practice and 2) realism is the foundation for style, you take the real world features of something and then you push/exaggerate them.
Without a foundation in reality (realism) you end up with some ultra avant garde shit that ends up looking amateur or nonsensical even when it's technically proficient

[Anonymous No.785965]

>>785943

My Opinions Are Fact: The Post.

[Anonymous No.785994]

>>782212
As much as I do still recognize it as 3d, I feel that this image does do something that a real portrait photo can't.
I think I love the potential 3D has to make something BEYOND lifelike instead of JUST lifelike.
I love hyperrealism. It's hard to describe, it references reality, yet it also makes it so overly rendered and detailed that it becomes surreal. I swear that the pic POPS OUT because of exaggerations I can't describe.

[Anonymous No.785997]

>>782149
Kek'd

[Anonymous No.786025]

>>785994
You can make stuff that in reality are impossible.

[Anonymous No.786041]

>>782147
Wrong on so many levels it's embarrassing

[Anonymous No.786130]

[Anonymous No.786246]

>>782147
people just want to leave this reality to live in another one they like, that's why video games improve their graphics to become more and more photorealistics and that's why people so easily dive in and forget the other reality, this guy a total dumbass, the "real thing" is shit.

[Anonymous No.786260]

>>786130
hypergan isnt 3d fag

[Anonymous No.787091]

This one made me pick up 3d character rendering
https://www.zbrushcentral.com/t/wonderful-woman/205871/218

[Anonymous No.787551]

>>781857
The right eye gives it away. Otherwise breddy gud.

[Anonymous No.787800]

There is a website that renders in a image of a person that doesn’t exist XD if anything of that hits base anywhere near

[Anonymous No.788365]

>>786246
Video games improve graphics because it's the easiest way to get away with rereleasing the same game with progressively less content while also creating very useful gatekeeping barriers like making mod-content impossible to produce.

[Anonymous No.790552]

>>780502
well, stylegan learns from photos, so of course it's gonna look like a photo
something similar should work for 3d though yeah

[Anonymous No.790554]

>>781911
untrained eye here (came here to see what the board's like), would fool me as a film frame or something, but if i expand it, the shading on hair and clothing looks weird (unless that's what expensive clothing looks like)